Scotrail future plans for network enhancements

[Wtloild]

Does anyone know if they have any particular BEMU rolling stock in mind?

 

[GRALISTAIR]

What does that mean for XC services though?

Without English cooperation it must mean bimodes one assumes? Electric while in Scotland and diesel in England.

EDIT - I have now thought longer about this- implication with discontinuous electrification TRIMODES will be needed.

 

[option]

What does that mean for XC services though?

The Voyager trains will be 30+ years old by 2035, so will likely be due for replacement.
There should also be a lot more of the XC mileage electrified by then; Snow Hill lines, Oxford-Leamington Spa, etc, so replacement with bi-modes would be possible.

 

[mr_jrt]

With regard to the discussions above about feeders in little islands, would there be a case for extension leads a-la Stalybridge, or do the "gaps" and obstacles exceed distances that can be handled by something like that?

 

[td97]

Borders line is slowly getting worked out

Construction commencing before the end of 2021. The section from Tweedbank to Bowshank Tunnel wired initially.

 

[Bill57p9]

If I’m understanding this screenshot from the video correctly the pink sections will be wired by 2030 is that correct?
View attachment 99170

I also find BEMU 2030 & EMU 2035 in that map baffling.

In the south west, I can totally see the ambition to wire filly to Kilmarnock and then operate BEMU to Dumfries. But why on earth would Dumfries be wired fully to Sanquar but not to Gretna, as the latter has more than double the traffic and I can't think of any major structures. And then connect the discontinuously electrified GSW mainline at Mauchline with full wiring to Ayr?? No passenger service and, apart from when the WCML is shut, not enough weekly freight movements to warrant the use of a second hand to count them.

 

[NotATrainspott]

I also find BEMU 2030 & EMU 2035 in that map baffling.

In the south west, I can totally see the ambition to wire filly to Kilmarnock and then operate BEMU to Dumfries. But why on earth would Dumfries be wired fully to Sanquar but not to Gretna, as the latter has more than double the traffic and I can't think of any major structures. And then connect the discontinuously electrified GSW mainline at Mauchline with full wiring to Ayr?? No passenger service and, apart from when the WCML is shut, not enough weekly freight movements to warrant the use of a second hand to count them.

Isn't it the other way around? The EMU by 2035 sections would be wired after the BEMU by 2030 ones. So, a Glasgow-Dumfries service in 2030 would be a BEMU using wires to Barrhead, then battery power to Kilmarnock, wires to Sanquhar, and then battery to Kilmarnock.

BEMUs require a quite different pattern of electrified sections. A traditional electrification scheme can only be done incrementally - e.g. you'd go to Barrhead, then Kilmarnock, then Dumfries, then Carlisle. At each stage, EMUs would stretch further and further. With a BEMU, you're optimising for the battery capabilities alongside the easiest sections to wire up. You want the batteries to be fully charged at the end of the wires, and then you'd need to start them again before the battery would run out. The Kilmarnock-Sanquhar wiring is long enough for a BEMU depleted after reaching Kilmarnock to be sufficiently charged to reach Dumfries.

Leaving the Barrhead-Kilmarnock section alone is a good demonstration of what BEMUs can do. It means you don't have to worry too much about redoubling that line ahead of electrification. We will probably see similar wiring gaps wherever there's something that might pause a straightforward wiring team, like the need to remodel Perth station.

 

[waverley47]

Isn't it the other way around? The EMU by 2035 sections would be wired after the BEMU by 2030 ones. So, a Glasgow-Dumfries service in 2030 would be a BEMU using wires to Barrhead, then battery power to Kilmarnock, wires to Sanquhar, and then battery to Kilmarnock.

BEMUs require a quite different pattern of electrified sections. A traditional electrification scheme can only be done incrementally - e.g. you'd go to Barrhead, then Kilmarnock, then Dumfries, then Carlisle. At each stage, EMUs would stretch further and further. With a BEMU, you're optimising for the battery capabilities alongside the easiest sections to wire up. You want the batteries to be fully charged at the end of the wires, and then you'd need to start them again before the battery would run out. The Kilmarnock-Sanquhar wiring is long enough for a BEMU depleted after reaching Kilmarnock to be sufficiently charged to reach Dumfries.

Leaving the Barrhead-Kilmarnock section alone is a good demonstration of what BEMUs can do. It means you don't have to worry too much about redoubling that line ahead of electrification. We will probably see similar wiring gaps wherever there's something that might pause a straightforward wiring team, like the need to remodel Perth station.

This is correct.

A battery unit should have a range of about 35 miles on flat ground comfortably, with a stop every ten minutes or so, without needing charged, and where there is no risk of running out of juice.

So, you make sure that the maximum gap without wires is 30 miles. Battery units can charge under the wires, and use batteries on the hard bits. Barrhead to Kilmarnock needs doubling before wires, and Perth needs remodelling first.

So you wire as far as Barrhead, and from Kilmarnock south, and leave the bit in the middle for later when you've ensured all journeys can be run by BEMUs. Same as the borders line. If you make sure you can charge at each end, then you only have to wire the two ends immediately, then come back to do the bits in the middle at a later date when everything has switched to BEMUs.

It's important to note that in England, while we may see something similar, there hasn't been a commitment to do the middle bits as well. In Scotland, the government wants wires everywhere possible because it's cheaper to run an EMU, and so has committed to coming back for the difficult bits by 2035.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

With regard to the discussions above about feeders in little islands, would there be a case for extension leads a-la Stalybridge, or do the "gaps" and obstacles exceed distances that can be handled by something like that?

No as a general rule there are of course always exception. Scotland goal is to electrify most so no point. If you are going to the expense of extension leads you might as well wire.

 

[waverley47]

What does that mean for XC services though?

This isn't really ScotRail's problem. It's more a problem for GBR when that spools up.

If the Scottish government turns around and says "no more diesel trains north of the border beyond 2030" then the UK government has to pull its finger out and decide on bimodes or cutting services at Newcastle.

Yes, I have advocated heavily for XC to continue running to Edinburgh, but 2030 is high time to have started thinking about switching to bimodes anyway. It would be a heavy loss of connectivity to cut services, but I can kind of see ScotGov's point. What the UK government does or doesn't do is outside its remit, instead it has to concentrate on how to better the situation north of the border.

Worst case scenario, I could forsee a derogation for five years or so, until 2035, to run as far as Edinburgh, but nobody wants voyagers trundling around for much longer than that anyway. Sooner or later replacements will be needed, and bimodes are the best solution as long as the UK government dithers on electrification. I suspect we'll see a battle of wills between the two, and I suspect this argument may come down in favour of the Scottish position.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

It's important to note that in England, while we may see something similar, there hasn't been a commitment to do the middle bits as well. In Scotland, the government wants wires everywhere possible because it's cheaper to run an EMU, and so has committed to coming back for the difficult bits by 2035.

I guess the advantage of that approach is that, if for some reason it turns out to be impossible (or there's no money) to do the difficult bits by 2035, then you can leave them and you've still achieved the primary aim of, no running on diesel. I wonder if set against that there's a minor cost disadvantage that you have to commission BEMU trains that can run for 30-35 miles on batteries, only to then presumably rip the batteries out a few years later once you have electrified the entire line?

 

[waverley47]

I guess the advantage of that approach is that, if for some reason it turns out to be impossible (or there's no money) to do the difficult bits by 2035, then you can leave them and you've still achieved the primary aim of, no running on diesel. I wonder if set against that there's a minor cost disadvantage that you have to commission BEMU trains that can run for 30-35 miles on batteries, only to then presumably rip the batteries out a few years later once you have electrified the entire line?

The batteries won't be going though. They work well for last mile capability if the wires come down, and there has been a general move towards that idea anyway.

I suspect we've actually seen the last fully electric vehicles ordered in this country for a long time, and everything beyond that will have a small battery somewhere just to plod around depots ect.

If you're installing a battery, it doesn't really matter if it's able to move 10 miles at 20mph or 30 miles at 75 mph. All you have to do is switch out to a lighter one when time comes to replace it after a decade of use.

 

[NotATrainspott]

I guess the advantage of that approach is that, if for some reason it turns out to be impossible (or there's no money) to do the difficult bits by 2035, then you can leave them and you've still achieved the primary aim of, no running on diesel. I wonder if set against that there's a minor cost disadvantage that you have to commission BEMU trains that can run for 30-35 miles on batteries, only to then presumably rip the batteries out a few years later once you have electrified the entire line?

Electric car batteries seem to be doing well at finding alternative uses. Lots end up in special EV conversions, but there's also a big prospective market for static grid storage. An early Nissan Leaf battery might not give you much driving range any more, but it'll be able to power your house for a long time. The batteries fitted to trains will probably be even more modular, and shared between different train designs and other commercial uses. A warehouse full of surplus batteries can actually make you money, as you can plug them all into the grid and provide grid balancing and emergency supply services.

 

[Meerkat]

Is there a date for wiring Edinburgh suburban so the ECML freight can be electric?

 

[Falcon1200]

Leaving the Barrhead-Kilmarnock section alone is a good demonstration of what BEMUs can do. It means you don't have to worry too much about redoubling that line ahead of electrification.

Barrhead to Kilmarnock needs doubling before wires

I'm not sure why Barrhead/Kilmarnock needs (more) redoubling for electrification ? The current infrastructure is perfectly adequate (as long as Lugton SB is switched in !) for a half-hourly service, would electric trains generate a need for a more intensive service ?

 

[waverley47]

I'm not sure why Barrhead/Kilmarnock needs (more) redoubling for electrification ? The current infrastructure is perfectly adequate (as long as Lugton SB is switched in !) for a half-hourly service, would electric trains generate a need for a more intensive service ?

The plan is 2tph semi-fast and 1tph fast as far as Kilmarnock, with the fast continuing as far as Carlisle and one of the semi-fasts a distance down the line (Dumfries has been suggested but I expect it will be new cumnock as after that it gets a bit sparse)

3tph each way needs redoubling as it won't work, and given the desire following electrification to switch some freight workings onto the GSW, it would make sense to redouble the short distance.

 

[option]

This isn't really ScotRail's problem. It's more a problem for GBR when that spools up.

If the Scottish government turns around and says "no more diesel trains north of the border beyond 2030" then the UK government has to pull its finger out and decide on bimodes or cutting services at Newcastle.

Yes, I have advocated heavily for XC to continue running to Edinburgh, but 2030 is high time to have started thinking about switching to bimodes anyway. It would be a heavy loss of connectivity to cut services, but I can kind of see ScotGov's point. What the UK government does or doesn't do is outside its remit, instead it has to concentrate on how to better the situation north of the border.

Worst case scenario, I could forsee a derogation for five years or so, until 2035, to run as far as Edinburgh, but nobody wants voyagers trundling around for much longer than that anyway. Sooner or later replacements will be needed, and bimodes are the best solution as long as the UK government dithers on electrification. I suspect we'll see a battle of wills between the two, and I suspect this argument may come down in favour of the Scottish position.

As i've said on multiple other threads, the Voyagers/Meridians have got another 15-20 years life in them, which gets you to 2035 anyway.
I don't see new stock for XC before then, & ordering bi-modes now for a 2025 delivery just allows someone to put off electrification.

There will still be petrol & diesel engines in use, it's only new ones banned from 2030, & for private vehicles & small vans.

I also can't see ScotGov barring them until all of ScotRail is operating non-ICE services.

 

[Backroom_boy]

There will still be petrol & diesel engines in use, it's only new ones banned from 2030, & for private vehicles & small vans.

I also can't see ScotGov barring them until all of ScotRail is operating non-ICE services.

I can see them pushing for 100% bio-diesal in all rail refuelling points in Scotland in the next 5 years.

 

[NotATrainspott]

I'm not sure why Barrhead/Kilmarnock needs (more) redoubling for electrification ? The current infrastructure is perfectly adequate (as long as Lugton SB is switched in !) for a half-hourly service, would electric trains generate a need for a more intensive service ?

It's a fairly obvious section of track near Glasgow that could benefit from redoubling. Getting that done is not as much a matter of if, but of when. As a result, it's maybe not the best idea to install standard electrification now, as you'd need to re-electrify as well as redoubling later. I figure it's possible to install electrification to be future proofed against redoubling, if you use twin-track cantilevers sited for redoubling, but there'd still be extra effort needed when the track works are done. BEMUs mean that awkward sections like these can be ignored so long as there's enough electrification elsewhere.

Also, yes. Once you've electrified a route, you're probably looking at a more intensive service pattern. It might not happen immediately, but it does make it more likely. For instance, it might be possible with the improved acceleration to fit in another stopper, while the incremental cost of running another EMU tends to be fairly low.

 

[mcmad]

I don't think Scot Gov has any say in what the long distance operators use, in fact I think that domestically being able to point that 'they' have achieved 'decarb' while the operators managed by DFT/Westminster are still using diesels would play well to their supporters.

 

[Class 170101]

I can see them pushing for 100% bio-diesal in all rail refuelling points in Scotland in the next 5 years.

Thats fine provided the bio diesel gives similar fuel range to now otherwise there might be problems.

 

[Falcon1200]

The plan is 2tph semi-fast and 1tph fast as far as Kilmarnock, with the fast continuing as far as Carlisle and one of the semi-fasts a distance down the line (Dumfries has been suggested but I expect it will be new cumnock as after that it gets a bit sparse)

Interesting, thanks for the info, however personally I am not sure the traffic to Kilmarnock, let alone from there to Dumfries, can justify such a level of service. Obviously passenger numbers are well down now (but who knows when or if they will recover ?), but this morning, at Barrhead at around 0920, a 2-car 156 on a Kilmarnock-Glasgow service was more than adequate, while the 4-car 156 I caught going south had perhaps 4 or 5 passengers per coach. Still, nothing wrong with ambition !

 

[option]

I can see them pushing for 100% bio-diesal in all rail refuelling points in Scotland in the next 5 years.

Standard diesel is already up to 5% bio, & people have been running diesel engines on a 50/50 homemade mix for years.

The processed biofuels can be 100% bio.

Crown Oil runs entire fleet on renewable diesel

biofuels-news.com

Biodiesel produced in the UK from used cooking oil

Looking to purchase commercial biodiesel produced in the UK? We produce biodiesel from used cooking oil with an 88% carbon saving compared to fossil diesel

www.olleco.co.uk

Thats fine provided the bio diesel gives similar fuel range to now otherwise there might be problems.

It does, see links above

I don't think Scot Gov has any say in what the long distance operators use, in fact I think that domestically being able to point that 'they' have achieved 'decarb' while the operators managed by DFT/Westminster are still using diesels would play well to their supporters.

I expect that the operators will start to change over to bio anyway. It's actually easier for them than individuals, as they take bulk deliveries to a few refuelling points, & even if they use a mix, it's an easy 'win'. (quick google suggests that the older Cummins engines used by a lot of trains can take up to a 20%bio mix, & I would think with some adaptions can go higher)

Do the long distance operators have their own fuelling points, or share them with local operators? If the latter, then if ScotGov decide that it has to be a bio mix, then that's what they'll be getting.

 

[Frankton Junct]

Interesting, thanks for the info, however personally I am not sure the traffic to Kilmarnock, let alone from there to Dumfries, can justify such a level of service. Obviously passenger numbers are well down now (but who knows when or if they will recover ?), but this morning, at Barrhead at around 0920, a 2-car 156 on a Kilmarnock-Glasgow service was more than adequate, while the 4-car 156 I caught going south had perhaps 4 or 5 passengers per coach. Still, nothing wrong with ambition !

When the WCML was closed in 2015 due to the storm damage at Lamington Viaduct, Virgin Trains ran a shuttle service between Carlisle and Glasgow Central via Kilmarnock. In order to path these services, Scotrail had to cancel their stopping services between Kilmarnock and Barrhead. Some of the Virgin Trains services called additionally at Kilmarnock. TPE were unable to run their services to Glasgow.

On Tuesday, 20th February 2018, I attended a talk given by John Yellowlees to a meeting of Pollokshields Heritage.

Tuesday, 20th February 2018
John Yellowlees
A graduate in geography and urban design, John Yellowlees spent seventeen years in the Departments of the Environment and Transport mostly in London before joining the railways in Scotland where he latterly led ScotRail's ‘Adopt a Station’ programme before retiring last year into an honorary role. A link between the two parts of his career was provided by Michael Portillo for whom he worked thirty years ago on transport for London Docklands, then in recent years provided support on filming the Scottish legs of Great British Railway Journeys.

Going Round in Circles
John will look at history of the Caledonian Railway and the development of Glasgow's South Side.

See Pollokshields Heritage Previous Lectures

John told us that Network Rail anticipate a long blockade of the WCML when they upgrade it for HS2 services and this is why they were (at that time) considering upgrade and electrification of the G&SW / Glasgow Barrhead and Kilmarnock Railway for diversion of freight and passenger services.

 

[Falcon1200]

When the WCML was closed in 2015 due to the storm damage at Lamington Viaduct, Virgin Trains ran a shuttle service between Carlisle and Glasgow Central via Kilmarnock. In order to path these services, Scotrail had to cancel their stopping services between Kilmarnock and Barrhead. Some of the Virgin Trains services called additionally at Kilmarnock. TPE were unable to run their services to Glasgow.

Working in Glasgow Control during the Lamington closure I am only too well aware of the pathing difficulties via the GSW ! To clarify, some Scotrail services were withdrawn (a suggestion I made very early on) to provide paths for diverted trains, but not all; A service was still provided, albeit reduced.

John told us that Network Rail anticipate a long blockade of the WCML when they upgrade it for HS2 services and this is why they were (at that time) considering upgrade and electrification of the G&SW / Glasgow Barrhead and Kilmarnock Railway for diversion of freight and passenger services.

That's interesting, although to be of any use the entire length of the GSW would have to be electrified throughout, which does not appear to be the current proposal. Wiring Mauchline-Newton Jc might also be necessary to accommodate freight.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

John told us that Network Rail anticipate a long blockade of the WCML when they upgrade it for HS2 services and this is why they were (at that time) considering upgrade and electrification of the G&SW / Glasgow Barrhead and Kilmarnock Railway for diversion of freight and passenger services.

Interesting. Without wanting to go too far off-topic, what kind of upgrade are they anticipating? I was under the impression that the plan was for HS2 trains to run on the existing WCML North of Preston, with the lower max speed (due to HS2 trains being non-tilting) compensated for by their quicker acceleration compared to Pendolinos giving similar journey times to today, and therefore no extensive upgrade required. Is that not correct?

 

[Frankton Junct]

Working in Glasgow Control during the Lamington closure I am only too well aware of the pathing difficulties via the GSW ! To clarify, some Scotrail services were withdrawn (a suggestion I made very early on) to provide paths for diverted trains, but not all; A service was still provided, albeit reduced.

I'm happy to accept that not all Scotrail local services were withdrawn and I am sure you did the best you could given the constraints of the route. The point I was trying to make is that Transport Scotland / Scotland's Railway / Network Rail regard the GBK and GSW route as a strategic route between Glasgow and England rather than just an outer suburban route and so proposals to redouble Barrhead to Lugton prior to electrification would be considered in that context.

That's interesting, although to be of any use the entire length of the GSW would have to be electrified throughout, which does not appear to be the current proposal. Wiring Mauchline-Newton Jc might also be necessary to accommodate freight.

I agree. Much more than redoubling and electrification would be necessary if the route is to have capacity for full diversion of WCML traffic. However, (eventual) electrification of the whole GSW route is in the published strategic plan.

Interesting. Without wanting to go too far off-topic, what kind of upgrade are they anticipating? I was under the impression that the plan was for HS2 trains to run on the existing WCML North of Preston, with the lower max speed (due to HS2 trains being non-tilting) compensated for by their quicker acceleration compared to Pendolinos giving similar journey times to today, and therefore no extensive upgrade required. Is that not correct?

The proposed upgrade of the WCML for HS2 would be to ease the radius of curves through Annandale. Major civil engineering.

 

[Bald Rick]

That's interesting, although to be of any use the entire length of the GSW would have to be electrified throughout, which does not appear to be the current proposal.

Don’t forget that Avanti have bimodes on order.

The proposed upgrade of the WCML for HS2 would be to ease the radius of curves through Annandale. Major civil engineering.

Getting my long since retired crayons out, I always fancied a tunnel between Elvanfoot and Abington, under Mid Hill. Would enable a 2 minute saving. Although it would cost quite a few quid!

 

[Falcon1200]

The proposed upgrade of the WCML for HS2 would be to ease the radius of curves through Annandale. Major civil engineering.

Look forward to seeing how that develops ! One fairly simple idea, which I am slightly surprised has never been considered, is realigning the current sharp curve between Carstairs South and East Junctions onto the original much straighter route (the 'Queen's Curve).

 

[option]

Getting my long since retired crayons out, I always fancied a tunnel between Elvanfoot and Abington, under Mid Hill. Would enable a 2 minute saving. Although it would cost quite a few quid!

Straight line from Kirkpatrick-Fleming to just north of Castlemilk, about 17km.